The Intersection Between John Brennan (Nominated As CIA Director) & A “Mysterious” Death During Obama’s First Term…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

The more one digs the dirtier one gets, and the stench never quite evaporates. Such is the case when ones efforts are directed at unraveling/uncovering the leftist/Islamist hydra permeating Washington’s body politic.

Many thousands of readers (friends, nearest and dearest too) were taken aback by the tidbits posted regarding those who “dropped like flies” – under mysterious circumstances – often less than six degrees separated from the leader of the free world. While deeply disturbing, the less than kosher circumstances more than warranted investigations. They are ongoing.

In fact, a revisit to this “delicate” subject is a no-brainer, especially since one related player (to said droppings) is up for a major posting. O M G !

Just as a recap, the following is more than germane: 

And rational folks must ask themselves:what constitutes mysterious deaths under the Obama regime? – .

In furtherance of the above, another way to approach the issue is: are the mysterious deaths bad luck, or something more? – . The people have a need…a right…to know.

Adding to the mysterious deaths is a saga of down and dirty intrigue – … lending to the suspicions that something isn’t quite kosher with the POTUS, as well as his underlings, leading back to the latest news. Never ending.



Employee breached files when eligibility issue during 2008 campaign

NEW YORK – John Brennan, the Obama counter-terrorism adviser nominated this week to head the CIA, played a controversial role in what many suspect was an effort to sanitize Obama’s passport records.

On March 21, 2008, amid Obama’s first presidential campaign, two unnamed contract employees for the State Department were fired and a third was disciplined for breaching the passport file of Democratic presidential candidate and then-Sen. Barack Obama.

Breaking the story, the Washington Times on March 20, 2008, noted that all three had used their authorized computer network access to look up and read Obama’s records within the State Department consular affairs section that “possesses and stores passport information.”

Contacted by the newspaper, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack attributed the violations to non-political motivations, stressing that the three individuals involved “did not appear to be seeking information on behalf of any political candidate or party.”

“As far as we can tell, in each of the three cases, it was imprudent curiosity,” McCormack told the Washington Times.

The spokesman did not disclose exactly how the State Department came to that conclusion.

By the next day, the story had changed.

The New York Times reported March 21, 2008, that the security breach had involved unauthorized searches of the passport records not just of Sen. Obama but also of then-presidential contenders Sens. John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

Again, the New York Times attributed the breaches to “garden-variety snooping by idle employees” that was “not politically motivated.”

Like the Washington Times, the New York Times gave no explanation to back up its assertion that the breaches were attributable to non-political malfeasance.

Still, the New York Times report indicated then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had spent Friday morning calling all three presidential candidates and that she had told Obama that she was sorry for the violation.

“I told him that I myself would be very disturbed if I learned that somebody had looked into my passport file,” Rice said.

The newspaper quoted Obama as saying he appreciated the apology but that he expected the passport situation “to be investigated diligently and openly.”

According to the New York Times report, Obama’s tone of concern was obvious.

“One of the things that the American people count on in their interactions with any level of government is that if they have to disclose personal information, that is going to stay personal and stay private,” Obama told reporters. “And when you have not just one, but a series of attempts to tap into people’s personal records, that’s a problem, not just for me, but for how our government is functioning.”

The New York Times noted that the files examined likely contained sensitive personal information, including Social Security numbers, addresses and dates of birth, as well as passport applications and other biographical information that would pertain to U.S. citizenship. Only at the end of the article did the New York Times note that State Department spokesman McCormack had emphasized the most egregious violation appeared to have been made against Obama.

Obama was the only one of the three presidential candidates involved who had his passport file breached on three separate occasions. The first occurred Jan. 9, 2008, followed by separate violations Feb. 21 and March 14, 2008. Moreover, all three of the offending employees had breached Obama’s files, while each of the passport files of McCain and Clinton had been breached only once.

The Brennan connection

The New York Times noted the two offending State Department contract employees who were fired had worked for Stanley Inc., a company based in Arlington, Va., while the reprimanded worker continued to be employed by the Analysis Corporation of McLean, Va.

The newspaper gave no background on either corporation, other than to note that Stanley Inc. did “computer work for the government.”

At that time, Stanley Inc. was a 3,500-person technology firm that had just won a $570-million contract to provide computer-related passport services to the State Department.

Analysis Corporation was headed by Brennan, a former CIA agent who was then serving as an adviser on intelligence and foreign policy to Sen. Obama’s presidential campaign.

After Obama’s inauguration, Brennan joined the White House as assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for homeland security and counter-terrorism.

By March 22, 2008, the Washington Times reported that the State Department investigation had focused on the contract worker for the Analysis Corporation, because he was the only one of the three involved in breaching the passport records of both Obama and McCain, the two presidential candidates whose eligibility as “natural born” citizens under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution were in question.

Keeping with the theme that the motive for the passport breach was attributable to mischief, the three State Department contract employees received relatively light penalties for their offenses – two were fired and one was reprimanded.

Although at the time the State Department promised a full-scale investigation, the public was kept in the dark.

In July 2008, the State Department’s Office of Inspector General issued a 104-page investigative report on the passport breach incidents, stamped “Sensitive But Unclassified.” The report was so heavily redacted, it was virtually useless to the public. Scores of passages were blacked out entirely, including one sequence of 29 consecutive pages that were each obliterated by a solid black box that made it impossible even to determine paragraph structures.

Investigative reporter Kenneth Timmerman said a well-placed but unnamed source told him that the real point of the passport breach incidents was to cauterize the Obama file, removing from it any information that could prove damaging to his eligibility to be president.

According to the theory, the breaches of McCain’s and Clinton’s files were done for misdirection purposes, to create confusion and to suggest the motives of the perpetrators were attributable entirely to innocent curiosity.

Another thief enters the case

Within a few days, a new witness surfaced unexpectedly, providing evidence that breaching passport files was an offense being perpetrated by State Department officials on a massive and everyday basis.

The case centered on Leiutenant Quarles Harris Jr., age 24. Harris, who spelled his named differently than the officer rank, was a petty drug dealer and identity-theft criminal who never served in the military or in any police or fire department.

On March 25, 2008, at approximately 9:30 p.m., Officer William A. Smith Jr. of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department’s Narcotics Special Investigation Division stopped an oncoming vehicle that had tinted windows he believed were in violation of the D.C. Tinted Window Act of 1994.

After stopping the vehicle, Smith found the driver, Harris, and his female passenger had been smoking marijuana. Harris had stuffed in his jacket pocket a large clear zip-lock bag containing 13 smaller clear zip-lock bags, each filled with marijuana.

The affidavit of criminal complaint filed by Smith with the U.S. District Court specified that in the search of the vehicle, the officers found 19 different credit cards with names different from Harris and his female passenger. Also discovered were eight State Department passport applications, also in names different from Harris and his female passenger.

The officers further discovered four of the names on the passport applications matched the names on the credit cards. A check with American Express while Harris was still on the scene of the traffic stop indicated that some of the American Express cards in his possession, but not in his name, had recently been used and that American Express had placed a “fraud alert” on the cards.

Smith brought Harris to the D.C. Metropolitan Police Sixth District, where agents of the U.S. Secret Service, the State Department and the U.S. Postal Service questioned him. Harris’ involvement in passport application theft clearly made him no ordinary petty criminal.

According to the criminal complaint filed by Smith, Harris admitted under questioning that he obtained the passport information from an unnamed co-conspirator working at the State Department. The complaint said the passport applications were used to obtain credit cards in the names of the passport applicants.

Another unnamed co-conspirator working at the U.S. Postal Service intercepted the issued credit cards before they were delivered to the residences of the persons named on the cards.

What was clear from Harris’ statements was that breaching passport records at the State Department had developed into major criminal activity conducted on a continuing basis by State Department employees with access to the State Department’s Passport Information Electronic Records System, commonly known by the acronym PIERS.

What also was clear was that Harris had information related to the State Department employees who had breached Obama’s passport records and that he was cooperating with government officials.

Despite the objection of the prosecutors, the judge at his arraignment released Harris the next day on personal recognizance. He was ordered to return to court for a hearing in June 2008.

Key witness murdered

However, Harris did not live to attend the court hearing.

On April 18, 2008, he was found murdered in Washington, D.C., by a single bullet to the head in what appeared to be a drive-by shooting.

The Washington Times reported April 19, 2008, that a “key witness in a federal probe into passport information stolen from the State Department was fatally shot in front of a District church” at close range, around 11 p.m., in the 2800 block of 12th Street NE, according to the Metropolitan Police Department.

Harris, who the Washington Times described as “cooperating with federal investigators,” was found slumped dead at the steering wheel of his car in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in the northeast section of D.C., according to Commander Michael Anzallo, the head of the Metropolitan Police Department’s Criminal Investigations Division.

A police officer patrolling the neighborhood at the time of Harris’ death heard gunshots and ran to the scene, only to find Harris dead inside his car. The Metropolitan Police admitted a “shot spotter” device had been used to locate Harris in the shooting, although police officials declined to say whether his death was a direct result of his cooperation with federal investigators.

There is no evidence that today links Harris’ crimes or murder with the breach of Obama’s passport records by State Department contract employees.

At first glance, Harris could be dismissed as a foot-soldier selling marijuana and peddling credit cards fraudulently obtained via passport-related identity theft.

Yet there is more to the story than petty criminal activity. Obviously, Harris got himself in way over his head when he decided to work with the State Department officials accessing PIERS to obtain passport records without authorization.

Equally obvious was that by being willing to cooperate with police, Harris risked becoming a threat to his accomplices and co-conspirators within the State Department.

ABC news affiliate WJLA-TV in Washington, D.C., reported Cleopatria Harris, the mother of Leiutenant Quarles Harris, believed her son was murdered to keep him from cooperating with the federal investigation into the passport-record breach. She told the TV station her son was in court three days before his murder.

“He felt like he was going to do jail time. He was willing to do jail time,” she said, indicating that she believed news reports that her son had been arrested and was cooperating with the police were the reason he was killed. “Yes I do. think it had a hell of a lot to do with it. [The story] made my son appear to be a snitch.”

Similarly, the Washington Post reported Cleopatria Harris was “absolutely sure” her son was killed because of his involvement in the passport-credit card scam.

Harris’ mother refused to believe her son’s murder was an act of violence unrelated to the passport scheme. Instead, she contended he was killed because he was an important witness regarding a State Department breach of passport records.

To date, the D.C. Metropolitan Police have no suspects in the still unsolved murder of Leiutenant Quarles Harris Jr. Nor has the State Department ever revealed publicly what was discovered in the breach of Obama’s passport records. The three individuals involved in the breach have never come forward in public to tell what they found.

Obama discloses trip to Pakistan

But this is not the end of the story.

Two weeks after the report that Obama’s passport records had been breached, candidate Obama made the surprising disclosure at a private fundraiser April 7, 2008, that he had traveled to Pakistan during his college years.

Jake Tapper, then senior White House correspondent for ABC News, commented that Obama’s disclosure that he had taken a college trip to Pakistan was “news to most of us.” Tapper said “it was odd we hadn’t heard about it before, given all the talk of Pakistan during this campaign.”

Tapper reported that, according to the Obama campaign, Obama visited Pakistan in 1981, the year he transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University, and that he had visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia on the same trip.

Why was Obama disclosing now, for the first time, that he had traveled to Pakistan with his roommates from Occidental College?

Did Obama use an Indonesian passport to travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in 1981, and was he concerned the breach of his passport records might end up disclosing such information, if true?

The attempt to preempt such a disclosure might explain the timing of Obama’s decision to suddenly reveal, at least to the friends assembled for the fundraiser, the previously undisclosed trip to Indonesia and Pakistan.

“I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college,” Obama is heard saying on the poor-quality audiotape that survives from the San Francisco fundraiser. “I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”

This much is for sure – certainly not stupid enough to post all of the above without having a “confirmation” process. As such, standing by said assertions, which involves a whole lot more than suspicions.

Basically, Barack HUSSEIN Obama has chosen, as head of America’s intel assets, someone who is intimately connected to Benghazigate, as well as to suspicious circumstances surrounding a State Dept. employee’s death. Who knows what other skeletons are in their closets.

Coincidences? You decide. 
In this blogger’s humble estimation, cover up does not even begin to describe the above! 


What Happens When Investigations Into Deaths – Associated With The Highest Levels of Gov’t – Are Thwarted? Freedoms Die Too…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Let’s take a brief stroll down memory lane but this mental meandering will shortly bring us squarely back to the present. Patience, dear readers. All in due time.

To begin with, to believe that Vince Foster (deputy counsel to former President Clinton, you know, the POTUS who committed perjury; was impeached; yet still kept his job, yes, that lying scum) committed suicide is to believe in the tooth fairy. Similarly, to posit that Benghazigate has anything to do with a video is to conclude that pigs can fly. Or if you buy that several mysterious deaths, connected to the Thug-in-Chief, are accidental, well, then unicorns are real too. And these are just a tiny sampling of the too many lies they tell/sell, and whereby DOA bodies are ‘inexplicably’ never far behind. Who do they think they are, Houdini?

The point being, when leaders – especially those who are supposed to lead the free world – feel that they are untouchable, tyranny is not far behind. And when a compliant media jumps on board, the amount of lying becomes more than a free country can bear. Its price is inordinately and exponentially too high to pay.

Some of us may recall the tall tales told, when Clinton’s reprobate White House decided that the Oklahoma City terror attack was not the people’s business. Say what? The biggest terror attack pre 9/11/01 (other than Pearl Harbor) became one cover up after another. And if not for a compliant media, a courageous investigative reporter, Jayna Davis, would not have had to do her own very dangerous digging – Yet those who facilitated the lies (covering up the solid as a rock Middle East connections) are still free to wreck more mischief. Shades of a banana republic, even back in 1995.

Par for their (wretched) course, an administration hell bent on keeping the Mid East out of Oklahoma City’s carnage, similarly, the death of Vince Foster (ostensibly by suicide…hint: Whitewater) was also shrouded in mystery, yet the truly rational were dictated…move right along…nothing to see.

Thank heavens there are still those intrepid enough to follow leads, wherever they go. And despite whatever pressure is exerted to ‘close the case’ some keep digging. Kudos. The following recently released expose should whet many truth seeker’s appetites. 

‘Following Orders: The Death of Vince Foster, Clinton White House Lawyer’

Prologue – Canada Free Press, Dec 4, 2012

While it might have initially appeared that the deputy counsel to the president of the United States was taking a nap in a park—lying neatly face-up on a steep embankment with his feet pointing down—Vincent W. Foster Jr. was not napping. He was dead. Dressed in expensive trousers and a white dress shirt, less than eight miles from the White House, he was lying dead. A single gun-shot wound to the head. Dead. Some of the blood on Foster’s face was still wet, but starting to dry. A trail of bloodflowed upwards from his nose to above his ear. The man who found his body said there was no gun, but after he left to notify police, a gun appeared in Foster’s hand. It was July 20, 1993. President William Jefferson Clinton’s Arkansas childhood friend, and First Lady Hillary Clinton’s Rose Law Firm partner, and White House confidante was dead.

At the pinnacle of his law career, where rumors of a U.S. Supreme Court appointment abounded, Foster, the loving husband and father of three, who worked directly with the most powerful couple in the world, was dead. The tall, handsome, Southern gentleman, would never see his forty-ninth birthday, never laugh, smile, or speak again. The twinkle in his hazel eyes was forever darkened. Vince Foster was dead.

White House reporter: “Considering Mr. Foster’s position and his status [in the Clinton White House], isn’t it reasonable to assume that law enforcement agencies are at least going to make some attempt to determine a motive here? For example, if you don’t do that, you’ll leave open wild possibilities, such as that he may have been being blackmailed or anything like that—just to rule those things out? Don’t you think it’s reasonable that a law enforcement agency will attempt to establish a motive?”It was an executive assistant in Hillary’s presidential counsel’s office, Linda Tripp, who was officially one of the last people to have seen Foster alive in the White House.

Clinton Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers: “My only point, is that at this point, the Park Service Police is the only agency that’s investigating [Vince Foster’s death], and that the objective of their search is simply to determine that it was a suicide.”

Are we clear? The objective of the investigation into Vince Foster’s death was “simply to determine that it was a suicide [emphasis mine].” The conclusion was predetermined. From the get-go, homicide, foul play, the possibility of blackmail, a potential risk toAmerica’s national security, was never investigated. Facts be damned. Vince Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park. No need for the Clinton White House to cooperate with investigators or the press. They didn’t. Case closed. Move on …

In America there has been a slow, creeping destruction of the freedom of speech and of the rule of law, and soon all Americans will lose free speech completely if they do not fight for it now. Though the road to silencing legitimate questions from the media and Americans alike may have been a long, deliberate one, crafted by those in power like Hillary and Bill Clinton—used to stay in power, and to thwart the rule of law—it becomes harder to reverse the silencing trend, expose government malfeasance, and hold corruption accountable if people do not stand up and speak now. Like an undiagnosed cancer, silence permits corruption to grow. Not to speak is to speak. You must choose your side.

The word “cover-up” is defined as: “a usually concerted effort to keep an illegal or unethical act or situation from being made public.”

It has often been said in the history of modern political scandals, that the cover-up is much worse than the crime or the incident. I will leave that to you to decide.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press ….” Despite the fact that Vince Foster’s sudden death was the shocking and questionable passing of the highestranking U.S. government official since President John Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963, asking obvious questions about it became taboo and politically incorrect.

Even though the Senate Whitewater Committee investigation’s conclusion revealed that there was “a concerted effort by senior White House officials to block career law enforcement investigators from conducting a thorough investigation” into Foster’s death, and recommended “that steps be taken to insure that such misuse of the White House counsel’s office does not recur in this, or any future, administration,” meaningful and honest reporting was still attacked. Journalists or investigators who dared to speak truth to power by asking legitimate and common-sense questions were sidelined, mocked, dismissed as right-wing hacks or scolded by Hillary for inflicting “great emotional and monetary damage on innocent people.”

Americans no longer had a right to know what was happening in their White House, and the lawlessness and secrecy in government has only gotten worse ever since. This is one of the many reasons why the Foster story must be told now. As history is repeating itself in the scandal-ridden Obama-Clinton regime—from Fast and Furious, to Wikileaks and Benghazi-Gate—investigators are being thwarted once again, and Americans are in danger around the world and at home.

Yet despite that, the Obama-Clinton regime was reelected to lead America for a second term. Hillary and Bill Clinton are being re-crafted as moderates, and speculation for a Hillary 2016 presidential run endures whether or not she remains serving as President Obama’s Secretary of State. It’s upside down. Americans deserve to know what happened in their White House and they have been lied to. Americans deserve to know what is happening in their White House now and always and they are still being lied to with no accountability or consequence in sight.

This must end—now.

As President John F. Kennedy said during a speech in New York entitled, “The President and the Press,” on April 27, 1961, “The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it … Without debate, without criticism, no administration, and no country can succeed, and no republic can survive.”

As promised, back to the present but keep in mind the previous POTUS’s shenanigans, just 17 yrs ago. And just substitute a POTUS who chased skirts marathon-like…parsed the truth via ‘what is the meaning of is’ (you can’t make this stuff up)…to the current Liar-in-Chief who swings the other way…but lies like a drunken sailor too. 

And one needn’t be a cynic nor a skeptic to wonder: who the hell is this man-child? –

Nor, does one have to be more than basically curious to question: what really went on at Rev Wrights’s ‘Church’? –

And all these logical questions lead straight to some very mysterious deaths, each one less than six degrees separated from the Thug-in-Chief –…leaving folks to ponder: is it plain bad luck or something more?

Yet tied into all the questions is the underlying subtext: which way does the POTUS lean? – …and this is not a reference to his political persuasion!

Most significantly, living in a democracy mandates citizens to keep a watchful eye over their leaders. And it is this obligation which not only keeps renegade leaders at bay but also allows for liberty to exist.

Nothing is for free, least of all freedom. And if most believe that the price is too high, then surely tyranny will prevail. The choice is yours.